It was one of those items on the morning news that make you drop your toast in horror. I sat transfixed as I listened to the chilling report: a man with Down’s syndrome was taking legal action against an NHS trust after a “Do not resuscitate” (DNR) order was placed on his medical file. Yet another example of those with disability being disregarded and disrespected, I thought. His lawyers claimed it was “nothing short of blatant prejudice” – and I nodded along. How dare doctors deem this man’s life in some way inferior or compromised simply because he has learning disabilities?

But, as so often with cases like this, when I looked closer, I found that it is a far more nuanced story than the stark radio bulletin suggested. In fact, I reversed my opinion.

What this case exposes is the insidious and damaging effect that TV and films have on our understanding of the limits of medicine. The man with Down’s syndrome is 51. He also has dementia that is so severe he is fed via a tube inserted into his stomach at the nursing home where he is cared for. The legal case is being brought by a member of his family on his behalf because he is so impaired. It’s all painfully sad.

As someone who has worked for several years in this area of medicine, I have been involved in making similar decisions. It’s easy to fall into the trap of wrongly assuming that a DNR order is something to do with restricting or withholding regular treatment from a patient in an attempt to hasten his or her demise. This is not the case.

The decision not to resuscitate someone only impacts on their management in the unlikely instance that their heart stops while they are an inpatient and they require cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). That doesn’t mean that the patient won’t still receive active treatment on the ward.

Related Articles

The decision has no impact on the regular clinical decisions made about the patient. It just means that, should their heart stop beating, attempts will not be made to restart it. It’s not a decision that is taken lightly. In the case of those who are unable to provide consent, the decision about resuscitation is with the doctors, not the family. This is to ensure that the decision made is on the clinical facts and on the likelihood of a successful resuscitation. Whatever is decided must be done in collaboration with the family, and in my working life to date, I’ve never known relatives to disagree when things have been explained carefully to them.

For most people, though, the only point of reference they have for resuscitation is what they see on TV. Sadly, the way it is usually portrayed, as well as the success rates, are woefully inaccurate. But research shows that patients’ preference for CPR is directly related to the successful procedure they see on TV.

A recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine showed the CPR success rate on TV was around 75 per cent. In reality, in otherwise fit individuals, the success rate is around 20 per cent. In people with dementia, the success rate is much, much lower, with only about 3 per cent of those who undergo CPR surviving to the point of being discharged from hospital.

The truth is that resuscitating a patient in hospital is far more traumatic and risky than you would expect. Far from being dynamic and adrenalin-inducing for those taking part in the procedure, it has been responsible for some of the most haunting experiences I’ve had as a doctor. It is so often a brutal, cruel and ultimately pointless intervention in the last moments of a life.

The small screen or celluloid portrayal usually involves the hero/heroine pushing at the victim’s chest a few times before a miraculous return to consciousness. Where is the relentless pounding, sweating and broken ribs that result from violent pumping? There is no lifeless body with cannulas in bruised arms and tubes down the throat. Even successful CPR is not without risks: in the worst cases, the person is left brain damaged or lives for a few more days in pain, only to die anyway.

DNR is not about making a value judgment about someone’s life. It’s about making a judgment on the likelihood of success if CPR were to be needed and what their life might be like afterwards. This is what seems to have been missed in the furore over the recent case. That’s not to say there weren’t problems with the way it was managed. There has been a failure to communicate with the family. But at no point did anyone say that the man shouldn’t be resuscitated because he had Down’s syndrome.

To suggest otherwise is to grossly misrepresent this case and to do those who battling true disability discrimination a disservice. It’s not always easy to accept, but sometimes not doing anything at all is the kindest thing a doctor can do. A DNR notice on someone’s notes doesn’t mean the doctor doesn’t care. On the contrary, it means the doctor has actively thought about the patient’s best interests.

Mothers, accept that research will say you’re doing the wrong thing – and ignore it

Leave your baby to cry, don’t leave it to cry. Cuddle it, stroke it, ignore it: from doctors and midwives to mother-in-laws and strangers in the supermarket, the poor first-time mother is inundated with contradictory advice.

Yet another study into parenting techniques published last week showed that allowing an infant to settle itself does it no harm, and can in fact enable both the child and the parent to get a better night’s sleep. But what about all those mums and dads who rush to soothe their offspring? Are their babies going to grow up to be neurotic?

Understandably, people are worried to distraction about doing the right thing. I think the best advice came from an obstetrician I met as a medical student: do what you feel is right for you and your baby, and to hell with everyone else. I think she was right. In the long term, it really doesn’t matter. No one looks back and says: “The reason I didn’t get that promotion is because my parents left me to cry while they had a glass of Chablis and watched the EastEnders omnibus.”

Whatever you choose to do and whichever technique you decide on, accept that at some point research will be published telling you you’re doing the wrong thing.

Have no fear because, given enough time, more research will appear telling you that you’re doing the right thing. The baby, of course, will probably just cry regardless.

Thank you Berry much

I’d like to personally thank Mary Berry, who seems to have single-handedly reinvigorated proper home baking with The Great British Bake Off. According to Debenhams, cake tins, food mixers, jugs and ovengloves are all flying off the shelves, with cake stand sales up 207 per cent compared to this time last year.

Everyone seems to be at it. In the past few weeks, the staff on the ward where I work have been treated to hand-made cupcakes, sponges and cookies from relatives saying thank you. I could certainly get used to this. It makes a very pleasant change from the usual tin of Quality Street.

Max Pemberton’s latest book, 'The Doctor Will See You Now’, is published by Hodder. To order a copy, call Telegraph Books on 0844 871 1515 or go to books.telegraph.co.uk